“Milano, Italy-based user interface designer Sebastiano Guerriero has envisioned this great looking full-on Apple.com redesign which has left me speechless this morning,” Christian Zibreg writes for iDownloadBlog. “I’m especially digging the uniformity, focus on large images with less text and single-colored buttons that much resemble the design language of iOS 7.”

“But what’s really floored me is his awesomely flattened navigation bar at the top. I know Apple has removed some of the shine and depth to it over the years,” Zibreg writes. “But – but – Guerriero’s version is so much better! I’m not exaggerating, his mockup is an eye-candy and puts Apple’s current website design to shame, hands down.”

On the contrary Thomas, FYI the government hires contractors exclusively for its people and their skills and not because their name sounds cool, like Blackwater or Cogent Computers.

My questions were rhetorical but you answered them anyway. You and the other mouth breathers who flamed my comment know exactly what I meant and yet you think the idea is stupid to hire him to build websites.

If he immigrated to America and opened his doors as a one-man private contractor to get government work, you and 10 others would say no? Is that what you would have us believe?

He appears to be more interested in visual design than the complexities that led to the initial problems with Healthcare.gov. I don’t think that the appearance of the site was the problem, but if it was, I would highly recommend him.

A sign of the times. More potatoes less meat. When I go to a website I want information not “Eye Candy”. This is just that, “Eye Candy”. This is just pandering to the masses that are distracted by the shiny baubles instead of focusing on the information.

Great point but I think you are in the minority. People like and buy shiny things over dull even if the dull thing is better. I can think of some car comparisons but don’t want to start that argument as beauty is subjective. In the end a corporate website is a balance of content (technical data) and aesthetics (marketing).

There is a very clear purpose for the existence of the art and skill of graphic (visual) design. It is to convey a message in the most appropriate way.

The “Eye Candy” is an expression coined by people who don’t understand this. When a web site is build by a skilful and experienced designer, it will be delivering its content in most efficient and effective way.

The balance between “information” and “Eye Candy” is NOT a consequence of the work of the site’s designer; it is a result of poor content decision. The designer simply packages the content (provided to him/her by content owner) in most effective and efficient manner.

The mock-up offered here seems to do exactly that — with the existing content that Apple currently provides on its web site, the design improves on the effectiveness, as well as efficiency.

Nothing to do with shining baubles, eye candy or any of that. It is all about delivering information to the reader.

I would add in response to your statement, “The balance between “information” and “Eye Candy” is”

Information Design.

Terrific college course.

Eye candy is a euphemism for select elements being given special treatment until your brain’s “muscle” memory is developed, after which the “candy” coating could be omitted over time as the button recedes.

The classic “stop light” feature in the upper-left corner of every Mac window has been the subject of such treatment over the last thirty-years as its design has changed to accommodate more information.

Designers are paid to communicate a ton of information to the most people in the least amount of time. Those who can, can be a powerful team member.

That’s why the Desktop trash can is such a powerful icon and Bill Gates had to have it by any means possible.

Agreed. If I’m a quality shopper and I go to Walmart, then I go to Lord & Taylor, which one do you think I’m going to think has better quality? If I go Walmart, chances are I’m a Windows user, you know where the Apple crowd is going to shop, and it isn’t Walmart.

Personally, I would characterize this as making it as ugly as iOS 7. I will say I’m past the point where I see it any more, but when I stop and look, I remember how much I like the previous version and just how awful iOS 7 looks.

And that’s you. For me, every time I pick up my brother’s iPhone 4 with iOS6, i cringe at the stale, unappealing and inefficient look and feel of it, compared to iOS 7. And in the beginning, I was also one of the skeptical, not quite excited about the new visual interface. It probably took all of two weeks to get thoroughly won over.

Hence my use of the word personally… I will say that everyone that I know feels the same way. What I don’t get though is your use of efficient. I’m talking about the look of the icons and many of the programs Apple changed. How is one icon design more efficient than another?? How is a plain (and often visually painful) black and black interface more efficient?

Functionally I agree it has been improved which is why I tell the ones who haven’t yet done to go ahead and upgrade. I tell them they will get used to the new look soon enough.

I didn’t feel Rorschach’s comment was worth replying to but with yours I will finally do so.

Something like Predrag, I don’t understand the over-complicated, cluttered environment comment. They are simply icons. It isn’t as though there are fewer to unclutter the screen. Nor do plain icons uncomplicated the user interface. For my eye, they simply make it less visually appealing. In fact, as I said my previous reply to Predrag, I think the icons are almost painful to look at.

I just looked at Apple’s site and I think it looks great. The header menu looks a little cleaner in this design but also takes up more real estate. I prefer the layout of the Apple site, if I was to improve anything it would be Search, if you don’t spell Aperture correctly you won’t find it.

All he did was take the current toolbar on Apple.com and apply the flat iOS design to it (along with incorrect casing of the product names). This is what Apple.com currently looks like:

This happens often…

Apple begins implementation of something. A designer or developer jumps ahead on the same track. Apple gets around to implementing the change on the same component, and the people get butt-hurt over Apple copying them.

Ya, guess what folks, this isn’t an example of innovative design, but rather a prediction of how Apple will likely change their toolbar.